基于改进权重湿润指数的东北地区春玉米涝渍灾害评估方法

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.11.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究东北地区春玉米涝渍灾害评估方法,为气候变化背景下东北地区春玉米合理生产和管理提供科学依据。【方法】以权重湿润指数为基础,采用作物需水量代替参考作物蒸散量,构建改进权重湿润指数;运用1986—2015年东北地区春玉米生育期内涝渍灾害事件与改进权重湿润指数耦合方法、基于K-S检验的正态分布显著性检验方法和t-分布区间估计方法等,确定基于改进权重湿润指数的东北地区春玉米不同生育阶段涝渍强度分级阈值;从农田土壤相对湿度与改进权重湿润指数相关性和拟合关系检验,改进权重湿润指数、权重湿润指数评估结果与历史灾情结果一致性检验,以及典型年份涝渍灾变过程动态评估准确性检验3个方面,对改进权重湿润指数评估春玉米涝渍灾害的精度进行验证;分析东北地区春玉米不同生育阶段涝渍强度空间格局,揭示其规律特征。【结果】（1）改进权重湿润指数与不同深度的土壤相对湿度均达到极显著相关（P<0.001）,除玉米快速发育期外,其他生育期内二者相关系数最大值均出现在20 cm深度土壤相对湿度;将不同生育阶段改进权重湿润指数与20 cm深度土壤相对湿度间进行Slogistic曲线拟合,决定系数（R ²）最大值出现在生育中期（0.46）,其后依次是生育后期（0.34）、快速发育期（0.31）和初始生长期（0.21）,均方根误差（RMSE）最小值出现在生育后期（0.49）,其后依次是生育中期（0.51）、初始生长期（0.52）和快速发育期（0.56）,不同生育阶段拟合曲线中90%的20 cm土壤相对湿度所对应的改进权重湿润指数值最小值出现在初始生长期（0.77）,其后依次是快速发育期（1.12）、生育中期（1.21）和生育后期（1.25）。（2）与随机预留的春玉米涝渍灾害事件测试样本中灾情判定结果相比,权重湿润指数评估结果的完全准确率为26.7%,部分准确率为66.7%;改进权重湿润指数评估结果的完全准确率为66.7%,部分准确率为93.3%。（3）以嫩江、白城和沈阳3个代表站点1998年春玉米生育期内涝渍灾害为例,对比降水、权重湿润指数和改进权重湿润指数随时间变化的过程曲线,发现改进权重湿润指数所反映的当年涝渍发生时间和强度等级与灾情资料更为相符,而其大小还可直观表征涝渍强度动态变化。（4）春玉米不同生育阶段各强度等级的涝渍频率差别较大,黑龙江中部、吉林东南部、辽宁东南部为中度及以上涝渍频率的高发区,生育中期是中度及以上涝渍频率高发期。【结论】基于改进权重湿润指数的东北地区春玉米不同生育阶段涝渍强度分级阈值划分方法结果可靠,可表征农田涝渍实际发生状况;相对于权重湿润指数而言,改进权重湿润指数不仅对春玉米涝渍灾害评估准确率更高,而且更适于对涝渍灾变过程的跟踪和动态评估,对于揭示气候变化背景下东北地区春玉米涝渍灾变机制和时空演变规律具有重要意义。

关键词: 东北地区, 春玉米, 改进权重湿润指数, 涝渍强度等级, 评估

Abstract:

【Objective】The aim of this study investigated the evaluation methods of spring maize waterlogging disasters in Northeast China, so as to provide a scientific basis for the rational production and management of spring maize in Northeast China under the background of climate change. 【Method】Based on the Weight Moist Index (WMI), the crop water demand, instead of the reference crop evapotranspiration, was used to construct an Improved Weight Moist Index (IWMI). The coupling method of waterlogging disaster events and IWMI during the growth period of spring maize in Northeast China from 1986 to 2015, the normal distribution significance test method based on K-S test, and the estimation method of t-distribution interval were used to determine the thresholds for waterlogging intensity grading of different growth stages in spring maize. The correlation and fitting relationship of soil relative humidity and IWMI, the consistency of the evaluation results on IWMI and WMI and waterlogging disaster statistics results, and the accuracy of the assessment on dynamic process of waterlogging disasters in typical years were analyzed to evaluate the IWMI precision. The spatial pattern of waterlogging at different growth stages of spring maize in Northeast China was analyzed, and then its regular characteristics were revealed. 【Result】 (1) IWMI was significantly correlated with soil relative humidity at different depths (P<0.001). Except for the rapidly developmental period of maize, in the other stages, the maximum correlation coefficient of both appeared at 20 cm depth. Through fitting the IWMI and the soil relative humidity at 20 cm depth based on a Slogistic model, it was found that the maximum coefficient of determination (R ²) appeared in the middle period (0.46), followed by the end period (0.34), the rapidly developmental period (0.31) and the initial growth period (0.21). The minimum root mean square error (RMSE) appeared in the end period (0.49), followed by the middle period (0.51), the initial growth period (0.52), and the rapidly developmental period (0.56). The values of the IWMI corresponding to soil relative humidity of 90% at 20 cm depth were 0.77 in the initial growth period, 1.12 in the rapidly developmental period, 1.21 in the middle period, and 1.25 in the end period. (2) Compared with the disaster diagnosis results in the test samples of the spring maize waterlogging disaster events randomly reserved, the complete accuracy rate and partial accuracy rate of the WMI evaluation results were 26.7% and 66.7%, respectively, while the complete accuracy rate and partial accuracy rate of the IWMI were 66.7% and 93.3%, respectively. (3)Taking the waterlogging disasters during the growth period of spring maize in 1998 in Nenjiang, Baicheng and Shenyang stations as examples, changes of the precipitation, WMI and the IWMI with the days of the year were compared, and it was found that the time of occurrence and intensity level of the waterlogging evaluated by the IWMI were more consistent with the disaster records, and IWMI could also be used to represent the dynamic change of the waterlogging intensity. (4) The frequency of waterlogging of the different intensity levels in spring maize had a great difference. The central part of Heilongjiang, southeastern Jilin, and southeastern Liaoning were high-incidence areas with moderate and above waterlogging, and the middle period was a period of high frequency of moderate and above waterlogging. 【Conclusion】Based on the IWMI, the method of determining the thresholds of waterlogging intensities at different growth stages of spring maize in Northeast China was reliable, which could be used to characterize the actual occurrence of farmland waterlogging. Compared with the WMI, IWMI not only had a higher accuracy, but also was more suitable to track and evaluate the dynamic assess of waterlogging disasters, which was of great significance to reveal the catastrophic mechanism and spatio-temporal evolution of spring maize waterlogging disasters in Northeast China under the background of climate change.

Key words: Northeast China, spring maize, improved weight moist index, waterlogging intensity grade, evaluation

刘聪,武永峰,刘平辉,梁立江. 基于改进权重湿润指数的东北地区春玉米涝渍灾害评估方法[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(11): 2182-2194.

LIU Cong,WU YongFeng,LIU PingHui,LIANG LiJiang. Evaluation Method of Spring Maize Waterlogging Disaster in Northeast China Based on Improved Weight Moist Index[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(11): 2182-2194.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.11.005

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2020/V53/I11/2182

图/表 8

表1

图1

表2

表3

表4

图2

表5

基于春玉米涝渍灾害事件的指标结果检验与对比"

事件序列 Sequence	发生站点 Station	灾情记录统计结果 Statistical of waterlogging		权重湿润指数评估结果 Evaluation results based on WMI			改进权重湿润指数评估结果 Evaluation results based on IWMI
事件序列 Sequence	发生站点 Station	时间 Time	程度 Degree	时间 Time	程度 Degree	检验情况Inspection	时间 Time	程度 Degree	检验情况Inspection
1	虎林 Hulin	1988.5.14-5.31	重 Severe	—	—	×	5月中-5月下 Mid May-Late May	中、轻 Moderate、light	◎
2	辽中 Liaozhong	1991.7.1-7.31	重 Severe	7.3-8.5	重 Severe	√	7月上-7月下 Early Jul-Mid Jul	重、重、重 Severe、severe、severe	√
3	同江 Tongjiang	1992.6.1-6.30	重 Severe	6.8-6.17	轻 Light	×	6月上-6月中 Early Jun-Mid Jun	重、重 Severe、sever	◎
4	鹤岗 Hegang	1994.9.30	重 Severe	9.20-10.17	中 Moderate	◎	9月下 Late Sept	重 severe	√
5	双阳 Shuangyang	1997.8.21	轻 Light	—	—	×	8月下 Late Aug	轻 Light	√
6	呼玛 Huma	1998.5.21-6.20	重 Severe	—	—	×	5月下-6月中 Late May-Mid Jun	重、重、重 Severe、severe、severe	√
7	榆树 Yushu	1998.6.28	轻 Light	—	—	×	—	—	×
8	方正 Fangzheng	2000.8.11-8.20	轻 Light	8.15-8.24	轻 Light	◎	8月中 Mid Aug	轻 Light	√
9	尚志 Shangzhi	2003.7.27	中 Moderate	7.26-8.12	轻 Light	◎	7月中 Mid Jul	中 Moderate	√
10	肇源 Zhaoyuan	2005.7.12-7.18	轻 Light	7.6-7.17	轻 Light	√	7月中 Mid Jul	轻 Light	√
11	通化县 Tonghua	2005.8.14-8.15	中 Moderate	8.13-8.29	中 Moderate	√	8月中 Mid Aug	重 Severe	◎
12	鸡西 Jixi	2008.8.12	轻 Light	8.12-8.21	轻 Light	√	8月中 Mid Aug	轻 Light	√
13	五营 Wuying	2009.6.19-6.21	重 Severe	6.19-7.10	重 Severe	◎	6月中-7月上 Mid Jun-Early Jul	重、重、中 Severe、severe、moderate	◎
14	辽源 Lianyuan	2010.7.19-7.24	重 Severe	7.21-8.11	中 Moderate	◎	7月下 Late Jul	重 Severe	√
15	东丰 Dongfeng	2013.8.14-8.17	轻 Light	8.16-9.7	中 Moderate	◎	8月中 Mid Aug	轻 Light	√

表5

图3

参考文献 39

[1]	中华人民共和国国家统计局. 中国统计年鉴. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2010- 2018.
	National Bureau of Statistics of the People's Republic of China. China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2010-2018. (in Chinese)
[2]	周琳 . 东北气候. 北京:气象出版社, 1991: 43-55.
	ZHOU L. Climate of Northeast China. Beijing: Meteorological Press, 1991: 43-55. (in Chinese)
[3]	余卫东, 冯利平, 刘荣花 . 玉米涝渍灾害研究进展与展望. 玉米科学, 2013,21(4):143-147.
	YU W D, FENG L P, LIU R H . Research progress and prospective of waterlogging on maize. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2013,21(4):143-147. (in Chinese)
[4]	PATRICIO G, GUILLERNO V I, MONICA L P, ANTONIO J H, NORA T . Responses to short-term waterlogging during grain filling in sunflower. Field Crop Research, 2007, ( 101):352-363.
[5]	霍治国 . 农业和生物气象灾害. 北京: 气象出版社, 2009.
	HUO Z G. Agricultural and Biometeorological Disasters. Beijing: Meteorological Press, 2009. ( in Chinese)
[6]	霍治国, 范雨娴, 杨建莹, 尚莹 . 中国农业洪涝灾害研究进展. 应用气象学报, 2017,28(6):641-653.
	HOU Z G, FAN Y X, YANG J Y, SHANG Y . Review on agricultural flood disaster in China. Journal of Applied Meteorological Science, 2017,28(6):641-653. (in Chinese)
[7]	朱建强, 李方敏, 张文英, 陈晓群, 程玲 . 旱作物涝渍排水研究动态分析. 灌溉排水, 2001,20(1):39-42.
	ZHU J Q, LI F M, ZHANG W Y, CHEN X Q, CHENG L . Research trends about surface and subsurface waterlogging drainage on dry farmlands. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2001,20(1):39-42. (in Chinese)
[8]	吴启侠, 苏荣瑞, 刘凯文, 朱建强, 杨威, 周元 . 江汉平原四湖流域近50年高温热害及热涝相随特征. 中国农业气象, 2012,33(4):609-614.
	WU Q X, SU R R, LIU K W, ZHU J Q, YANG W, ZHOU Y . Hot damage and concomitance of hot and waterlogging in four-lake basin in Jianhan plain during the last 50 years. Chinese Journal of Agrometeorology, 2012,33(4):609-614. (in Chinese)
[9]	吴贤云, 丁一汇, 王琪, 叶成志 . 近40年长江中游地区旱涝特点分析. 应用气象学报, 2006,17(1):19-28.
	WU X Y, DING Y H, WANG Q, YE C Z . Characteristics of the recent 40-year flood/drought over the middle reaches of the Yangtze. Journal of Applied Meteorological Science, 2006,17(1):19-28. (in Chinese)
[10]	郁凌华, 赵艳霞 . 黄淮海地区夏玉米生长季内的旱涝灾害分析. 灾害学, 2013,28(2):71-75, 80.
	YU L H, ZHAO Y X . Analysis of drought and flood disasters in summer maize growing season in Huang-Huai-Hai region. Journal of Catastrophology, 2013,28(2):71-75, 80. (in Chinese)
[11]	郭锐, 智协飞 . 中国南方旱涝时空分布特征分析. 气象科学, 2009,29(5):598-605.
	GUO R, ZHI X F . Spatial-temporal characteristics of the drought and flood in southern China. Scientia Meteorologica Sinica, 2009,29(5):598-605. (in Chinese)
[12]	马晓群, 吴文玉, 张辉 . 利用累积湿润指数分析江淮地区农业旱涝时空变化. 资源科学, 2008,30(3):371-377.
	MA X Q, WU W Y, ZHANG H . Analyzing spatial and temporal variations of agricultural drought and waterlog in Jianghuai area through accumulated humidity index. Resources Science, 2008,30(3):371-377. (in Chinese)
[13]	马晓群, 吴文玉, 张辉 . 农业旱涝指标及在江淮地区监测预警中的应用. 应用气象学报, 2009,20(2):186-194.
	MA X Q, WU W Y, ZHANG H . The agricultural drought and flood index and its operational application to monitoring and early-warning in Jianghuai area. Journal of Applied Meteorological Science, 2009,20(2):186-194. (in Chinese)
[14]	吴洪颜, 高苹, 谢志清, 曹璐 . 基于春季阴雨过程的冬小麦涝渍指数模型构建与应用. 气象, 2017,43(3):373-377.
	WU H Y, GAO P, XIE Z Q, CAO L . Construction and application of waterlogging index model of winter wheat based on spring rainy weather. Meteorological Monthly, 2017,43(3):373-377. (in Chinese)
[15]	秦鹏程, 刘志雄, 万素琴, 苏荣瑞, 黄敬峰 . 基于决策树和随机森林模型的湖北油菜产量限制因子分析. 中国农业气象, 2016,37(6):691-699.
	QIN P C, LIU Z X, WAN S Q, SU R R, HUANG J F . Identification of yield limiting factors for oilseed rape in Hubei province based on CART and Random Forest model. Chinese Journal of Agrometeorology, 2016,37(6):691-699. (in Chinese)
[16]	秦鹏程, 刘志雄, 万素琴, 刘敏, 苏荣瑞 . 基于权重湿润指数的作物湿渍害监测与检验. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018,27(2):328-334.
	QIN P C, LIU Z X, WAN S Q, LIU M, QIN P C . Application and validation of weighted moisture index in waterlogging disaster monitoring. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2018,27(2):328-334. (in Chinese)
[17]	ZAIDI P H, RAFIQUE S, RAI P K, SINGH N N, SRINIVASAN G . Tolerance to excess moisture in maize (Zea may L): Susceptible crop stages and identification of tolerant genotypes. Field Crops Research, 2004,90:189-202.
[18]	房稳静, 武建华, 陈松, 张静, 李晨, 刘瑞 . 不同生育期积水对夏玉米生长和产量的影响试验. 中国农业气象, 2009,30(4):616-618.
	FANG W J, WU J H, CHEN S, ZHANG J, LI C, LIU R . Experiment for the impact of flood in different development stages on summer maize growth and yields. Chinese Journal of Meteorology, 2009,30(4):616-618. (in Chinese)
[19]	RAI R, SRIVASTAVA K . Effect of waterlogging on some biochemical parameters during early growth stages of maize. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 2004,9:65-68.
[20]	王矿, 薛亚峰, 王友贞, 汤广民, 胡铁松, 袁宏伟 . 玉米涝渍胁迫的水分产量关系试验研究. 灌溉排水学报, 2012,31(6):67-70.
	WANG K, XUE Y F, WANG Y Z, TANG G M, HU T S, YUAN H W . Experimental study of relationship between water and yield of maize. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2012,31(6):67-70. (in Chinese)
[21]	刘祖贵, 刘战东, 肖俊夫, 南纪琴, 巩文军 . 苗期与拔节期淹涝抑制夏玉米生长发育降低产量. 农业工程学报, 2013,29(5):44-52.
	LIU Z G, LIU Z D, XIAO J F, NAN J Q, GONG W J . Waterlogging at seedling and jointing stages inhibits growth and development, reduces yield in summer maize. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2013,29(5):44-52. (in Chinese)
[22]	LU C P, XUE B, LU C Y, WANG T, JIANG L, ZHANG Z L, REN W X . Sustainability investigation of resource-based cities in Northeastern China. Sustainability, 2016,8:1058.
[23]	刘兵, 朱广石, 王平, 金剑, 王光华, 刘晓冰 . 东北农田涝渍成因和治理研究概况. 广东农业科学, 2010,37(11):276-278.
	LIU B, ZHU G S, WANG P, JIN J, WANG G H, LIU X B . Research advances on cause of water logging and administrating technologies in farm land of Northeast China. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 2010,37(11):276-278. (in Chinese)
[24]	中国科学院长春地理研究所沼泽研究室. 三江平原沼泽. 北京: 科学出版社, 1983: 58-59.
	Swamp Research Laboratory , Changchun Institute of Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Sanjiang Plain Marsh. Beijing: Science Press, 1983: 58-59. (in Chinese)
[25]	张桂香, 霍治国, 杨建莹, 张蕾, 吴立, 汪天颖, 杨宏毅 . 江淮地区夏玉米涝渍灾害时空分布特征和风险分析. 生态学杂志, 2017,36(3):747-756.
	ZHANG G X, HUO Z G, YANG J Y, ZHANG L, WU L, WANG T Y, YANG H Y . Spatiotemporal characteristics and risk analysis of summer corn waterlogging disaster in Jianghuai region. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2017,36(3):747-756. (in Chinese)
[26]	杨宏毅, 霍治国, 杨建莹, 张桂香, 吴立, 范雨娴 . 江汉和江南西部春玉米涝渍指标及风险评估. 应用气象学报, 2017,28(02):237-246.
	YANG H Y, HUO Z G, YANG J Y, ZHANG G X, WU L, FAN Y X . Indicators and risk of spring corn waterlogging disaster in Jianghan and west region of Jiangnan. Journal of Applied Meteorological Science, 2017,28(2):237-246. (in Chinese)
[27]	LU E . Determining the start, duration, and strength of flood and drought with daily precipitation: Rationale. Geophysical Research Letters, 2009,36(12):L12707. doi: 10.1029/2009GL038817
[28]	ALLEN R G, PEREIRA L S, RAES D, SMITH M . Crop evapotranspiration-guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Rome, 1998.
[29]	陈玉民, 郭国双, 王广兴, 康绍忠, 罗怀彬, 张大中 . 中国主要作物需水量与灌溉. 北京: 水利电力出版社, 1995: 77-95.
	CHEN Y M, GUO G S, WANG G X, KANG S Z, LUO H B, ZHANG D Z. Main Crop Water Requirement and Irrigation of China. Beijing: Water Power Press, 1995: 77-95. (in Chinese)
[30]	王建林, 毛留喜 . 现代农业气象业务. 北京: 气象出版社, 2010.
	WANG J L, MAO L X. Modern Agricultural Meteorological Business. Beijing: Meteorological Press, 2010. ( in Chinese)
[31]	MASSEY E J . The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1951,46:68-78.
[32]	张文彤 . SPSS统计分析基础教程. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2011.
	ZHANG W T. Basic Course of SPSS Statistical Analysis. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2011. ( in Chinese)
[33]	胡晓华 . Logistic曲线参数估计及应用. 数学理论与应用, 2011,12(4):26-50.
	HU X H . Parameters estimation for logistic curve and application. Mathematical Theory and Applications, 2011,12(4):26-50. (in Chinese)
[34]	郭建平, 庄立伟, 陈玥熤 . 东北玉米热量指数预测方法研究(Ⅰ) ——热量指数与玉米产量. 灾害学, 2009,24(4):6-10.
	GUO J P, ZHUANG L W, CHEN W Y . Study on prediction method of northeast corn thermal index (I)-thermal index and corn yield. Journal of Catastrophology, 2009,24(4):6-10. (in Chinese)
[35]	高晓容, 王春乙, 张继权, 薛绪掌 . 近50年东北玉米生育阶段需水量及旱涝时空变化. 农业工程学报, 2012,28(12):101-109.
	GAO X R, WANG C Y, ZHANG J Q, XUE X Z . Crop water requirement and temporal-spatial variation of drought and flood disaster during growth stages for maize in Northeast during past 50 years. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2012,28(12):101-109. (in Chinese)
[36]	YANG J Y, HUO Z G, WU L, WANG T Y, ZHANG G X . Indictor-based evaluation of spationtemporal characteristics of rice food in Southwest China. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2016,230:221-230.
[37]	汪天颖, 霍治国, 李旭辉, 杨建莹, 吴立, 张桂香 . 基于生育时段的湖南省早稻洪涝等级指标及时空变化特征. 生态学杂志, 2016,35(3):709-718.
	WANG T Y, HUO Z G, LI X H, YANG J Y, WU L, ZHANG G X . Level indicators and temporal-spatial distribution features of early rice flood disaster in Hunan province based on different growth stages. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2016,35(3):709-718. (in Chinese)
[38]	WU X, WANG P J, HUO Z G, WU D R, YANG J Y . Crop drought identification index for winter wheat based on evapotranspiration in the Huang-Huai-Hai plain, China. Agriculture, Ecosytems and Environment, 2018,263:18-30.
[39]	王培娟, 霍治国, 杨建莹, 吴霞 . 基于热量指数的东北春玉米冷害指标. 应用气象学报, 2019,30(1):13-24.
	WANG P J, HUO Z G, YANG J Y, WU X . Indicators of chilling damage for spring maize based on heat index in Northeast China. Journal of Applied Meteorological Science, 2019,30(1):13-24. (in Chinese)

强度等级 Grade	持续时间 Duration	过程累积程度指数 CWMI
正常No disaster	<10 d	≤10
轻度 Light	10 - 20 d	10 - 30
中度 Moderate	20 - 30 d	30 - 60
重度 Severe	>30 d	>60

生育阶段 Developmental stage	灾害等级 Disaster grade	改进权重湿润指数序列个数 Number of IWMI sequence	K-S正态分布显著性检验值 K-S test value for normal distribution significance	95%置信区间 95% confidence interval
初始生长期 Initial growth period	轻 Light	7	0.5363	0.73-2.92
	中 Moderate	8	0.2388	1.49-4.60
	重 Severe	18	0.8151	2.53-4.45
快速发育期 Rapidly developmental period	轻 Light	37	1.0000	1.14-1.84
	中 Moderate	36	0.8805	1.97-2.48
	重 Severe	61	0.5589	2.91-3.61
生育中期 Middle period	轻 Light	47	1.0000	1.26-1.63
	中 Moderate	64	1.0000	2.12-2.51
	重 Severe	64	0.0618	2.93-3.86
生育后期 End period	轻 Light	13	0.2673	1.26-2.56
	中 Moderate	8	1.0000	2.09-2.89
	重 Severe	15	0.0523	2.98-4.74

生育阶段 Developmental stage	涝渍强度等级 Waterlogging grade
生育阶段 Developmental stage	无涝渍 No waterlogging	轻度 Light	中度 Moderate	重度 Severe
初始生长期Initial growth period	≤0.75	（0.75,1.50]	(1.50,2.55]	>2.55
快速发育期Rapidly developmental period	≤1.15	（1.15,1.95]	(1.95,2.90]	>2.90
生育中期Middle period	≤1.25	（1.25,2.10]	(2.10,2.95]	>2.95
生育后期End period	≤1.25	（1.25,2.10]	(2.10,3.00]	>3.00

土壤相对湿度 Relative soil moisture	初始生长期 Initial growth period	快速发育期 Rapidly developmental period	生育中期 Middle period	生育后期 End period	全生育期 Whole growth period
10 cm	0.479***	0.533***	0.529***	0.460***	0.480***
20 cm	0.484***	0.492***	0.581***	0.532***	0.514***
50 cm	0.243***	0.391***	0.434***	0.412***	0.330***